Current Challenges to Appropriate Clinical Use of New Genetic Knowledge in Different Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To describe the challenges facing countries all over the world regarding the appropriate clinical use of genetics in their health care systems. Methods and Results: Aspects of the economic and social contexts in different countries which are of particular relevance to shaping the existing challenges are outlined. Issues which are relevant (but of different prominence) in all countries in providing genetic services are discussed. Conclusions: The challenges facing the provision of appropriate genetic services differ markedly in four major groups of countries. These challenges range from controlling inappropriate commercialization and the overuse of genetic approaches to putting in place even minimal basic community genetics services in countries where the infant mortality rate has fallen to a range where genetic and congenital disorders contribute substantially to ongoing handicap and early mortality. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.081 | 0.121 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".